Star News article by Muriel Newman critiquing the covid 19 response

Comment on Brett’s facebook page linking to this Star News article by Muriel Newman critiquing the government handling of Covid-19.

[ 27/4/20 ]

[Brett since deleted the post – so it has gone from facebook.
I did send this to the star-news with
“Headline: Has Muriel abandoned individual life as a value?

In her weekly opinion piece ‘Dangerous’ political vacuum forming – Muriel Newman seems to abandon the value of Individual Life.”
and then everything that follows without change.]

While I was a 3 time Act candidate, and know Muriel quite well, in my view she dangerously misrepresents the situation (seemingly for political capital, and as such makes a serious suite of errors).

She uses the term “natural immunity” like it was something valuable, without explaining what it actually means.

The only way to get such “natural immunity” is to have about 15% of those over 65 die, and about 1% of everyone else. That is every person you know over 65, 1 in six would be dead to give Muriel her “natural immunity”.

That is the reality.

I much prefer unnatural immunity – its called vaccination, and should be available within a year for those most at risk.

Once we have two sets of tools, vaccination for those most at risk (the elderly and those with respiratory conditions), and a suite of drugs that are effective at treating it (for the small group of others that are vulnerable for a host of biochemical reasons), then we can take the brakes off and let those who want to catch it do so, and have a few days to a couple of weeks feeling like they don’t really care if they live or die, before they recover and get “natural immunity”.

Personally, I’ll be taking the unnatural route, like I do driving my unnatural car to the beach or to national parks, and I wear my unnatural clothes, and use this unnatural computer for all sorts of tasks. And I chair both our Zone Water committee and the Hutton’s Shearwater Charitable Trust, so I am really committed to making a difference for nature; and I use every unnatural tool in the toolbox to do so.

When I joined Act it was because it was a party founded on classical liberal values of individual life and individual liberty.

In this article Muriel seems to have abandoned that prime value of individual life for some sort of economic dogma.

For me, Individual Life is always primary, and trumps everything else, including any sort of economic system, however long it has been around.

I am all for liberty, and liberty has to come with responsibility, primarily for the life and liberty of others, and by extension to the ecosystems that support us all.

So No – No marks for that article – not one of her better ones; no respect for life, and very few signs of responsibility.

About Ted Howard NZ

Seems like I might be a cancer survivor. Thinking about the systemic incentives within the world we find ourselves in, and how we might adjust them to provide an environment that supports everyone (no exceptions) - see
This entry was posted in Ideas, Nature and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comment and critique welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s